Read Richard III and the Murder in the Tower Online
Authors: Peter A. Hancock
Tags: #Richard III and the Murder in the Tower
Richard III and the Murder in the Tower (26 page)
Ramsay, J.
Lancaster and York
. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1892.
Richardson, G.
The Deceivers
. Baildon Books: Shipley1997.
Riley, J. C.
Rising Life Expectancy
. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001.
Rosenthal, J. T. ‘The Training of an Elite Group: English Bishops in the Fifteenth Century.’
Transactions of the American Philosophical Society
, 60 (5) (1970), 1-54.
Roskell, J. S.
The Commons and their Speakers in English Parliaments 1376-1523
. Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1965.
Scofield, C. L.
The Life and Reign of Edward IV
. London, 1923.
Smith, M. ‘Edward, George and Richard.’
The Ricardian
, 77 (1982), 49-49.
Somerset Record Society
The Register of Robert Stillington, Bishop of Bath and Wells 1466-1491
. 1937.
Vergil, P.
English History
(p. 117). Ed. H. Ellis. Camden Society: London, 1849.
Wigram, I. ‘Clarence still perjur’d.’
The Ricardian
, 73 (1981), 352-355.
Wigram, I. ‘False, fleeting, perjur’d Clarence: A further exchange, Clarence and Richard.’
The Ricardian
, 76 (1982), 17-20.
Wood, C.T. ‘The Deposition of Edward V.’
Traditio
, 31 (1975), 247-286.
Anon. ‘Foundation of the College of Heralds.’
The Ricardian
, 25 (1969), 9. Hammond, P. W. ‘The Deformity of Richard III.’
The Ricardian
, 62 (1978), 35.
Hammond, P. W. ‘The Illegitimate Children of Richard III.’
The Ricardian
, 66 (1979), 92-96. Hammond, P. W. & Weeks, M. ‘The Deformity of Richard III.’
The Ricardian
, 61 (1978), 21-24.
Johnson, D. ‘The Real Reason why Hastings Lost his Head.’
The Ricardian Bulletin
, Winter 2007, 38-41.
Leach, C. A. ‘A Mess of Strawberries.’
The Ricardian
, 29 (1970), 21-22.
McArthur, R. P. ‘Thomas Stanley.’
The Medelai Gazette
, 7 (1) (2000), 22-26.
Pitfield, F. P.
Bere Regis Church, Dorset
. Thomas Williams Educational Trust, Dorset Publishing Co.: Sherborne, Dorset, 2000.
Pollard, A. J. ‘North, South and Richard III.’
The Ricardian
, 74 (1981), 384-389.
Sweeney, J. ‘Cecily Neville: The Rose of Raby.’
The Medelai Gazette
, 4 (1) (1997), 14-18.
Wood, C.T. ‘The Deposition of Edward V.’
Traditio
, 31 (1975) 247–286.
The Cely, York and Stallworth Letters
The text of the Cely Letter reads:
Ther ys grett romber in the Reme/The Scottys has done grett yn Ynglond/Schamberlayne ys dessesset in trobell. The Chavnseler ys dyssprowett and nott content/The Boshop of Ely ys dede/Yff the Kyng, God ssaffe his lyffe, wher dessett/The Dewke of Glosetter wher in any parell/Geffe my Lorde Prynsse, wher God defend, wher trobellett/Yf my Lord of Northehombyrlond wher dede or grettly trobellytt/Yf my Lorde Haward wher slayne. De Movnsewr Sent Jonys.
1
A modern translation of this text reads:
There is great rumour in the realm, the Scots have done great [harm] in England, the Chamberlain is deceased in trouble, the Chancellor is desperate and not content, the Bishop of Ely is dead, if the King, God save his life, were deceased, the Duke of Gloucester were in any peril, if my Lord Prince, whom God defend, were troubled, if my lord of Northumberland were dead or greatly troubled, if my Lord Howard were slain.
2
The two primary things to note about this manuscript are, first, that it appears to be more of a memorandum that a letter
per se
; second, it appears to reflect some accurate information, e.g. Hastings is dead, but equally some inaccurate information, e.g. Morton is dead. The rest of the text is largely doom and gloom and it is replete with conditional ‘ifs.’ Another interesting issue is the reference to the king, the Duke of Gloucester as well as ‘my Lord Prince.’ Given the nature of the observations, we can place this writing with reasonable accuracy and must perhaps believe that the Lord Prince was Richard, Duke of York. The general tenor of uncertainty is obvious; however, there may be yet more to glean from this communication.
The two relevant letters of the time were written by Richard, Duke of Gloucester to his loyal supporters in the city of York. They have been published in Davies, R.,
Extracts from the Municipal Records of the City of York
, J. Nichols & Son: London, 1843. The first of written on 5 June 1483 and delivered to York by Brakenbury on 14 June. It reads:
The Duke of Gloucester, brother and uncle of King, protector and defensor, Great Chamberlain, Constable and Admiral of England. – Right trusty and well-beloved, we greet you well, and whereby your tres of supplication, to us delivered by your servant John Brackenbury, we understand that by reason of your great charges that ye have had and sustained, as well in the defense of this realm against the Scots as otherwise, your worshipful city remains greatly in poverty, for the which you desire us to be good means unto the King’s grace for an ease of such charges as you yearly bear and pay unto his highness, we let you wit that for such great matters of business as we now have to do for the weal and usefulness of the realm, we as yet do not have convenient leisure to accomplish this your business, but be assured that for your kind and loving dispositions to us at all times showed, which we cannot forget, we in goodly haste shall so endeavor us for your ease on this behalf as that ye shall verily understand we be your especial guide and loving lord as your said servant shall show you, to whom it will like you him to give further credence; and for ye diligent advice which he hath done to our singular pleasure, unto us at this time we pray you to give him laud (praise) and thanks, and God keep you. Given under our signet, at the Tower of London, the 5th day of June – To our right trusty and well-beloved the Mayor, Aldermen, Sherriff, and Commonalty of the City of York.
The second, a much more urgent communication, was written by Richard on 10 June 10th 1483 and was delivered to York by Richard Ratcliffe on 15 June. It reads:
The Duke of Gloucester, Brother and Uncle of the King, protector, Defender, great Chamberlain, Constable and Admiral of England. – Right trusty and well-beloved, we greet you well, and as you love the well of us, and the well and surety of your own self, we heartily pray you to come unto us to London in all the diligence you can possible after the sight hereof, with as many as you can make defensibly arrayed, their to aid and assist us against the Queen, her blood adherents and affinity, which have intended and daily doth intend, to murder and utterly destroy us and our cousin the Duke of Buckingham, and the old royal blood of this realm, and as it is now openly known, by their subtle and damnable ways forecasted the same, and also the final destruction and disinheritance of you and all other inheritors and men of honor, as well of the north counties as other countries that belong (to) us; as our trusty servant, this bearer, shall more at large show you to whom we pray you give credence, and as ever we may do for you in time coming fail not, but haste you to us hither. Given under our signet, at London, the 10th day of June. – To our right trusty and well-beloved John Newton, Mayor of York and his Brethren and the Committee of the same and every thane.
The two relevant letters of the time were written by Simon Stallworth to Sir William Stonor. These letters, among many others, have been published in Carpenter, C. (ed.),
Kingsford’s Stonor Letter and Papers, 1290-1483
(pp 159-160), Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996. The first, which was written on Monday 9 June 1483, reads:
Master Stoner, after dew recommendacons, I recommend to youe. As for tydyngs seyns I wrote to yove we her noun newe. Be Quene keps stylle Westm., my lord of zorke, my lord of Salysbury with othyr mo wyche wyll nott departe as zytt. Wher so evyr kanne be founde any godyse of my lorde Markues it is tayne. Be Priore of Westm. Wasse and zytt is in a gret trobyll for certeyne godys delyverd to hyme by my lord Markques. My lord Protector, my lord of Bukyngham with all othyr lordys, as well temporale as spirituale, were at Westm. in be councel chambre from x to ij, butt per wass none bat spake with be Qwene. Ber is gret besyness ageyns be coronacion, wyche schalbe bis day fortnyght as we say. When I trust ze wylbe at London, and ben schall ze knove all be world. Be Kyng is at be towre. My lady of Glocestre come to London on thorsday last. Also my lord commendys hyme to yove, and gave me in commaundement to wryte to you, and prayes you to be god Master to Edward Jhonson of Thame; He wass with my lord, and sued to be made a denyson for fer of be payment of bis subsidy: and my lord send to Jeves be clerke of be corone and sawe be commissione and schewyde to hyme bat he schold pay butt vj s. viij d. for hymeself: and so wer he better to do ben to be mayde denyson, wyche wold coste hym be third parte of his goods. And as for suche as have trobyld with in be lordchype of Thame my lord wylbe advysyd by you at your commyng for be reformacion, yf ze take note or ze come: for he thynkess bat bei schalbe punished in examplee of othyr. And Jhesu preserve yove. In haste from London by be handys of your servande, be ix day of June.
Simon Stallworthe.
To the right honorabille Sir William Stoner, knyghte.
The second, which was written on Saturday 21 June 1483, reads:
Worschipfull Sir, I commend me to you, and for tydynges I hold you happy that ye ar oute of the prese, for with huse is myche trobull, and every manne dowtes other. As on Fryday last was the lord Chamberleyn hedded sone apone noon. On Monday last was at Westm. Grret plenty of harnest men: ther was the dylyveraunce of the Dewke of Yorke to my lord Cardenale, my lord Chaunceler, and other many lordes Temporale: and with hym mette my lord of Bukyngham in the myddes of the hall of Westm.: my lord protectour recevynge hyme at the Starre Chamber Dore with many lovynge wordys: and so departed with my lord Cardenale to the toure, wher he is, blessid be Jhesus, mery. The lord Liele is come to my lord protectoour, and awates upon hyme. Yt is thought ther schalbe xx thousand of my lord protectour and my lord of Bukyngham men in London this weeke: to what intent I knowe note but to keep the peas. My lord haith myche besynes and more then he is content with all, yf any other ways wold be tayn. The lord Arsbyschop of Yorke, the Byshop of Ely ar zit in the toure with Master Olyver Kynge. (I suppose they schall come oute neverbelesse). Ber ar men in ther placese for sure kepynge. And I suppose bat ber shall be sente menne of my lord protectour to beis lordys places in be countre. They ar not lyke to come oute off ward zytt. As for Foster he is in hold and meue fer hys lyke. Mastres Chore is in prisone: what schall happyne hyr I knowe nott. I pray you pardone me of mor wrytyng, I ame so seke bat I may not wel holde my penne. And Jhesu preserve you. From London be xxj day of June be handys of your serand.
Simon Stallworthe.
All be lord chamberleyne mene be come my lordys of Bokynghame menne.
To the right worschipfull Ser Willm. Stoner, knyht.
On the Date of the Death of William, Lord Hastings
Modern historical research has tended to move away from what is seen as the more traditional, somewhat hidebound, litany of dates approach to history that was dominant in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. Understandable though this trend is, dates are important. In the present context, the date of the execution of William, Lord Hastings is absolutely pivotal. If what I have suggested is correct, it is really quite critical that Hastings was beheaded on Friday 13 June 1483, in the first rush of Richard’s anger. and not one week later on 20 June after a whole week for calmer deliberation.
In some sense, this concern over dating looks to be a non-issue. The date of Hastings’ execution is given by the
Crowland Chronicle
1
and there appear to be no contemporary records which contradict this information. This certainty might have persisted but for the protestation of Clements Markham, who, in 1891, argued that Hastings was actually executed one week later.
2
For Ricardian apologists this suggestion has some appeal, since it would tend to suggest that Richard had given Hastings the benefit of due process before dispatching him, instead of the summary execution which appears to argue for Richard’s more malevolent motivations. Markham’s position is not merely one of wishful thinking: he based his proposition on the Stallworth letter,
3
which was dated Saturday 21 June and referred to the execution as occurring on Friday last, the implication taken by Markham being that the preceding Friday was in fact 20 June.
4
This proposal tended to languish, most probably because it was an interpretation (and one which we shall see for which there is an evident explanation), and especially because no corroborative evidence could be found. This all changed in 1972 when in her article
5
Alison Hanham cited a passage in the Acts of the Court of the Mercers’ Company
6
which could be interpreted as indicating that William, Lord Hastings was still alive on Sunday 15 June, two days after his execution date. Her observations induced a response by Professor Wolfe,
7
who cited an impressive array of contradictory evidence which seemed to confirm the original date. Although Hanham had argued that some of the extant documents could have been altered, one of the primary sources of confirmation came from the building records of Kirby Muxloe castle.
8
Thanks to the great tradition of English workmen downing tools as soon as it looked like they might not be paid, we can see the most mobile of the workmen, the master masons, leaving Hastings’ unfinished structure after only working on Monday 16 June 1483. From this we may infer that news of Hastings’ demise reached the outskirts of Leicester sometime either during the weekend or on the Monday itself.
